People v. Rojas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rojas

51 A.D.3d 694, 855 N.Y.S.2d 914

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 6, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.3d 694 (People v. Rojas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Rojas, 51 A.D.3d 694, 855 N.Y.S.2d 914 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Honorof, J.), rendered April 11, 2007, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree (two counts), burglary in the first degree (two counts), and menacing in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v California, 386 US 738 [1967]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Skelos, J.E, Santucci, Covello, McCarthy and Chambers, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Honorof, J.), rendered April 11, 2007, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree (two counts), burglary in the first degree (two counts), and menacing in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see Anders v California, 386 US 738 [1967]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976]; cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Skelos, J.E, Santucci, Covello, McCarthy and Chambers, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.3d 694, 855 N.Y.S.2d 914, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rojas-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack